The Formula

I hope you're taking notes, because this will be on the quiz. IF YOU FAIL THE QUIZ YOU DIE.

I hope you’re taking notes, because this will be on the quiz. IF YOU FAIL THE QUIZ YOU DIE.

In the past few years, watching so much horror for this blog, I’ve seen an awful lot of generic, derivative tripe. Again and again I’ve argued that originality isn’t the only way to judge a film, and while that’s still true, there’s something particularly insulting about a film that just swaps a few arbitrary elements out of an otherwise recycled script.

The overwhelming “meh” quality of most of these movies makes them especially difficult to review. Mediocrity is boring, to watch and to discuss afterward. It could be argued that being a critic is useless, serves no purpose but fueling one’s own ego, or actually undermines the integrity of the art it takes as its subject; despite that, seriously guys stop making these movies. I mean it.

In this post I’m going to lay out what I think are the barest of bare bones of the majority of recent supernatural horror and supernatural thrillers (all loosely defined). Partly the sameness in these films comes from our hesitancy in dealing with the supernatural: we don’t really have a frame of reference for it in the contemporary Western world, except for horror films themselves. But more than that it comes from lazy filmmakers looking to ride the Conjuring wave all the way to the bank, or however that metaphor goes.

My skeleton plot occurs in a series of discrete steps. There are a couple of options for how each step unfolds, or how the characters respond. In practice these very often occur in combination. Here’s what I’ve been able to identify so far:


In the beginning, we get the background in easily digestible horror nuggets. It usually takes one of two forms.

1A) This place has a history.

We’re often introduced to the place before the people, as it were. Horror movies of the more generic variety open in a creepy location, either the place where most of the movie will occur or else a place somehow associated with some supernatural evil. Maybe the first kill of the movie happens here to some throwaway character before the main cast is introduced (often this kill will be somebody later revealed to be connected to the main characters in some significant way). This house is haunted, and here’s why. Etc. etc.


1B) There is an established pattern.

If the movie doesn’t dwell on the idea of a specific place, it may instead begin with a short sequence illustrating the basic premise: this VHS cassette is cursed and kills people who watch it; this monster is stalking firstborn brunette cheerleaders. Like 1A, there’s an example to be made, and the example sets the stage for the scary stuff to come. Mockumentaries will often narrate the history preceding the events of the film itself.


The supernatural isn’t just running rampant all over the world all the time, obviously. Usually it’s hidden from view. Something has to happen to upset the equilibrium. People come into contact with the supernatural in several ways, but there’s always some sort of change from the normal flow of things.

2A) Location, location, location.

Moving into a new house. Always a stressful experience, sure. And a perfect opportunity for otherwise unremarkable people to inadvertently offend some ghouls or whatever. At last count there were exactly 8,478 horror films that begin with people moving into a new house. (NOTE: I probably made that number up.)


2B) You meddling kids.

Young, stupid, reckless: horror movies want us to think that kids are just the worst. Especially a group of five attractive college students. (Cabin in the Woods really hit this nail on the proverbial head.) They screw around, drink, mock the unmockable, and otherwise justify their own eventual deaths by angering the spirits or whatever.


2C) You meddling journalist/documentarian/scholar/etc.

Sometimes the ancient evil is awoken by someone hoping to learn about it, or about the culture surrounding it. Or it may be a coincidence: an archaeologist studying an Upper Paleolithic burial site accidentally frees an ancient demon from its prison. There’s quite often a sub-theme of dangerous knowledge, a sense that Some Things Are Best Left Alone. Less frequently, but still often enough to note, the person may be deliberately seeking the supernatural as a source of power. In all cases, they learn, too late, that they really shouldn’t have done that thing they did. Whatever it was.

3) THE RISING ACTION (remember that from middle-school English class?)

Once the premise is laid out and we know the key players, stuff’s gotta start happening. So it does, of course. Furniture starts moving, or maybe somebody disappears, dark shapes move in the shadows, and the characters respond to these happenings in a couple of ways.

3A) Ain’t nobody got time for that.

Skepticism. Everybody’s a freaking skeptic. That stuff’s not real, man. Once the premise is established, and the scary stuff starts happening, we the audience understand immediately that the ghost is causing it, or the demon is responsible for pooping on the carpet and not the family dog, or whatever. But not the characters, oh no. Usually half the cast has to die before the rest will even acknowledge that something weird’s going on. This is among the most frustrating things the horror genre does, and ironically, one of the most unbelievable.


3B) That one guy/lady knew all along but s/he’s dumb/ugly/crazy/a witch/etc. so we don’t believe him/her.

This is really just a variation of 3A. There’s that one tinfoil hat guy, or that one local cat lady, or that self-styled “demonologist” dude, and they tell you the shit that’s going on like five minutes into the thing. But you can’t believe them, because then the movie would be over.


Shit’s all out on the table now, man. We finally believe, we finally know what’s going on, we know the identity of the ghost or where to find the relic that will banish the werewolf or whatever. There’s a last-ditch effort to be made, a Hail Mary that may just be crazy enough to work. Does it?

4A) So close and yet so far.

‘Twas all for naught. It seemed like it worked, but HAH! it didn’t. Jerks. All that work for nothing. See you in hell, losers.


4B) It… worked?

So the ritual succeeded/the spirit is appeased/the monster is dead! The hero and anybody else left get to gaze at each other with relief, maybe–gasp!–love? And cautious optimism gives way to hoarse laughter and limping off into the distance, possibly as the sun rises. Only SHIT FOOLED YOU YO it isn’t over yet, as there’s one more ravenous humanoid, or another clutch of demon eggs, or the ghost was actually just taking a smoke break. But you won’t find that out until the


Horror either has to be wrapped up in a neat bow, or else it has to continue endlessly, because fear is eternal. So you either get

5A) Closure.

It worked, it didn’t work, whatever. The main characters are done, either dead or too emotionally exhausted to care. Conversely, maybe they really did manage to shake off the curse or kill the demon, but the implication is usually that there’s more stuff like this out there. How could there be exactly one ghost and no others? You’re still dealing with a world where this shit is real, so even a “happy” ending–which is rare–has scary implications.


5B) No closure because screw you.

Sequels. The monster was faking it, the ghost wasn’t banished, the head vampire is still out there. Maybe the main characters don’t get away after all, killed in the last few frames by the gleeful monster relishing its own comedic timing. Or maybe we, the audience, catch a view of a dark shape sinking slowly back into the water or fading into the shadows of the abandoned castle. Either way, nothing has been resolved.

* * *

To be clear, these are deliberately really broad, broad enough to encompass nearly any supernatural plot. So following this outline does not automatically make a film bad. On the contrary, the greats of the genre have all followed this basic outline, but they’ve done it in ways that are smart, creative, and which disguise the generic narrative structure beneath good writing and cinematography.

What do you think about the formula? Is it too broad? Or too specific? Would you add anything? Is it possible to tell a supernatural story in film without following this outline?

6 thoughts on “The Formula

  1. The key lies in the execution. I think all stories (including horror) fit in the broadest interpretation of this formula. The ones that stick in the mind do something clever with the plot, like throwing in a novel twist or breaking a taboo, or showing us the story in a new way. The ones that stick in the mind and heart, however, are those that wrap an interesting character’s personal development inside the formula (and inside the horror genre.)

    This is why horror books are often more affecting than movies. We have time in the pages of a novel to understand and identify with a character, and follow his arc. (Right now I’m thinking of the difference between watching the movie adaption of Horns and reading Joe Hill’s book.)

    Now I’m trying to think of a movie that pulls it off. Some of Stephen King’s stories, especially the ones that aren’t horror exactly, do a good job. (Shawshank Redemption?) What about The Devil’s Backbone? Certainly some unforgettable characters in there.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s